MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4407801331 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0319024

Perceptions, experiences, barriers, facilitators, learning outcomes, and modes of assessment of digital clinical placements for pre-registration physiotherapy students internationally: a systematic review protocol

2025· review· en· W4407801331 on OpenAlexaff
Jeremy McConnell, Alison Rushton, Tim Noblet, Verity Pacey, Jai Mistry, D. T. Nguyen, Samantha Doralp

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Therapy Practice and Research
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCINAHLMEDLINESystematic reviewGrey literatureContext (archaeology)Medical educationProtocol (science)MedicineAlternative medicineNursingPsychological interventionPathologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The shift to digital clinical placements for physiotherapy education due to COVID-19 prompts a need for evaluation of current evidence. Existing studies highlight benefits of digital technology in clinical placements, but lack of a systematic review focused on pre-registration physiotherapy students is a key gap. This systematic review will address this gap by synthesizing the evidence for digital clinical placements for pre-registration physiotherapy students internationally. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This systematic review is designed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) statement and Cochrane Handbook - it is registered on PROSPERO (CRD42024571696). Search terms will be adapted to each database, including EMBASE, MEDLINE, PROSPERO, ERIC, and CINAHL. Key journals, forward citation tracking, references of included studies, and professional organization websites will also be searched. The search will include studies published since database inception to 31/05/24. There will be no limit to study design or language. Studies that report on perceptions, experiences, barriers, facilitators, learning outcomes, and modes of assessment of digital clinical placements for pre-registration physiotherapy students will be included. Meta-aggregation will be used to synthesize themes from findings which enables the generation of themes without the need to re-interpret data and the loss of study specific context. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not required. The results of this study will be written up for publication in relevant peer-reviewed scientific journals and contribute to a developing area of research. Results will also be presented at national or international conferences, events for the physiotherapy profession, or education events.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.095
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.083
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score0.504

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0950.083
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0170.014
Bibliometrics0.0140.011
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0060.008
Open science0.0050.005
Research integrity0.0080.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0510.007

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.225
GPT teacher head0.630
Teacher spread0.405 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicOccupational Therapy Practice and Research→French-language works237,207→